Rubio: Holder needs to resign

posted at 10:56 am on June 21, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

During a breakfast for reporters organized by The Christian Science Monitor on Thursday, Rubio responded “yes” when asked if he agrees with presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney and the five other U.S. Senators who have called for Holder’s resignation.

“I think we’re at the point of no return,” Rubio said.

I doubt that Marco Rubio alone will move the needle on a Holder exit. It does, however, force more coverage of the dispute over Operation Fast and Furious, including in places where it may not have been well covered before. For instance, the bastion of conservative thought known as the New York Daily News features an opinion column today from two legal experts demanding that the Obama administration and Holder come clean and produce the subpoenaed documents. They point directly to the misleading and shifting testimony of Holder and his staff at the Department of Justice as the underlying need for the disclosure:

For nearly a year and a half, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has been investigating why the Justice Department would approve the sale of thousands of weapons and not determine how they would be tracked. Since the beginning, Attorney General Eric Holder and the Obama administration have delayed or denied access to critical information about Operation Fast and Furious. Several times, Holder has had to clarify his testimony about the program, and information came to light directly countering what he had earlier told Congress. Despite having in his possession a subpoena since last October, Holder has refused to turn over more than 130,000 documents relating to Fast and Furious. …

The oversight committee, through a whistleblower, came into possession of six wiretap applications that show top-level Justice Department officials knew about this program but appeared to do nothing to ensure that dangerous firearms were monitored and prevented from harming others. A claim of executive privilege at this moment looks like the administration has something to hide, fueling suspicions rather than getting to the bottom of the matter. …

The fact is that Congress has a right to investigate, and questions about government involvement in a failed operation will persist until the full story is told. That cannot happen if the executive branch refuses to show documents that are directly germane to the investigation.

The longer that Holder and Barack Obama try to hide behind a spurious claim of executive privilege, the more it will become apparent that the country needs another Attorney General. Rubio is right; this shows that Holder, at least, has passed the point of no return.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Comments

Don’t leave the Spanish language media out of the equation here. The death toll south of the border has largely been treated as an addendum to the murder of Agent Terry here, but the fact that so many civilians have been killed, as a direct result of a U.S. operation which the Mexican government was never even told about, is stunning. Holder was finally shamed into an apology to Terry’s family, but who has apologized to the hundreds of grieving families in Mexico? Let someone at Univision as Obama about that.

JM Hanes on June 21, 2012 at 12:32 PM

The Mexican print/online media has been much better about covering the story than Univisión, Telemundo, etc. Many high-level Mexican politicians, from both major parties, have publicly expressed outrage over Fast and Furious and are demanding answers from the administration.

Video from a March 2009 press conference where gun walking/tracing was announced not only as an issue very important to the president, but directed by the president in conjunction with Attorney General Eric Holder:

Project Gunrunner is the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Southwest Border Initiative (BATFE was formerly known as ATF).

Project Gunwalker is the “whistleblower” and journalist’s name (coined by David Codrea) for the BATFE’s practice (“unofficial policy”) of deliberately allowing guns to illegally “walk” untracked across the border via known and suspected criminal straw buyers into Mexico and Honduras (among potentially many other Central American countries, as well as to drug cartel operatives within the US). This practice was first introduced to Project Gunrunner in early 2009, in the early months of the Obama administration.

Operation Fast and Furious is the BATFE name for the Phoenix, AZ division operation of Project Gunrunner. Fast and Furious was a 100% Obama/Holder DOJ operation.

Yup, Obama is coming after your guns.
Why, the past three years he approved a federal plan to allow guns in national parks, and has done little to bring back the federal ban on assault rifles or close the loophole that allows unlicensed dealers at gun shows to sell firearms without background checks.You can also now carry on Amtrak trains (unloaded, of course).
What more proof does one need?
It’s all right there. He’s coming….soon.
Better start stocking up on ammo now…conspiracy theorists UNITE!

Yup, Obama is coming after your guns.
Why, the past three years he approved a federal plan to allow guns in national parks, and has done little to bring back the federal ban on assault rifles or close the loophole that allows unlicensed dealers at gun shows to sell firearms without background checks.You can also now carry on Amtrak trains (unloaded, of course).
What more proof does one need?
It’s all right there. He’s coming….soon.
Better start stocking up on ammo now…conspiracy theorists UNITE!

Oh, make no mistake, Obama wants to ban civilian held guns. But even someone as stupid as he is knows that gun control is political suicide…Especially when coupled with his wildly unpopular Obummercare…Nice try though.

He wants to ban guns…by expanding gun-owner’s rights?
Wait, now I see the devious plan!
Flood the market with guns, expand gun owners rights…THEN sit back and watch everyone become horrified with the results (except the gun/ammo manufacturers, of course)therefore causing an anti-gun push at some undetermined point in the future. Ergo; gun ban.
That’s just simply genius!
Why, using that circular logic, shouldn’t we be encouraging (hell, demanding!) more and more abortions? When the baby killers realize that the population is dwindling and mankind is diminishing…THEN we will ban all abortions, thereby winning the war (at some indeterminate point in the future).
I can’t believe it took me this long to see through Obama’s smokescreen.
Quick…someone get ahold of Jerome Corsi..we need a point-man for this conspiracy! (or do we….?)

Perhaps you might want to start with the admin who started Fast and Furious.

Uppereastside on June 21, 2012 at 11:48 AM

You imbecile, the program under Bush was different in that they had Mexico involved and our agents kept tracked on the guns. ghe Mexicans agents knew aout the walking guns back then and they were tracking them. HOlder’s Justice department took it to a new level with F&F withiut Mexico imvolved and with losing track of weapone (our agents who were initially tracking the guns were ordered to stand down and let the guns walk/dissappear). Two Americans and hundreds of Mexicans died as a result, cretin. F&F was not a botched operation, its aim was not to catch gun runners but to use Mexican drug wars as an excuse to crack down upon gun rights and sales in the US..

Don’t leave the Spanish language media out of the equation here. The death toll south of the border has largely been treated as an addendum to the murder of Agent Terry here, but the fact that so many civilians have been killed, as a direct result of a U.S. operation which the Mexican government was never even told about, is stunning. Holder was finally shamed into an apology to Terry’s family, but who has apologized to the hundreds of grieving families in Mexico? Let someone at Univision as Obama about that.

You’re only itemizing things that Obama didn’t veto, which is, admittedly, evidence that he’s not politically insane. Of course, you could add not coming out against gun control efforts in Chicago (after it was already ruled unconstitutional, I believe) & DC to his voting “present” record.

You simultaneously ignore items that he has actively checked off his 2nd Amendment To-Do list, like say, informing gun control advocates that he’d have to advance the cause by working “under the radar,” or, in unparalleled irony, using seriously inflated numbers which have been debunked time and again to misrepresent the scale of cross border American gun trafficking. Then there’s the ATF email in which agents strategized about using the F&F debacle to push for long gun regulation….

The best could be said about Obama on this issue is that his public policy stance is utterly incoherent. That might even be the most plausible description, since it’s absolutely emblematic of his entire Presidency.

Mr Hanes, you’re right.
But Obama didn’t veto the national parks bill…he signed it into law (which clearly shows his desire to go after gun owners rights!)And inflating gun numbers, and political pandering to his base, is CLEAR indication that we better start loading up on weapons before the forthcoming ban takes affect!
As for the e-mail from ATF Field Ops Assistant Director Mark Chait to Bill Newell, ATF’s Phoenix Special Agent in Charge of Fast and Furious which addressed tracking multiple “long gun” sales …I fail to see how that can be traced back to Holder or Obama, or any attempt to constrict guns sales, in any way shape or form.
But you’re right, Obama’s incoherent stance on gun rights is CLEAR indication that the ban is secretly coming. How can anyone not see it?
Like I said…get Corsi on the horn. That is if he’s not too busy with the birth certificate stuff. Hey…maybe Orly Taitz is available?

The dots are connected?
Really?
So, which one is it; did Obama want to flood the Mexican market with guns, encouraging raging violence which would then cause the US public to become so alarmed that they would demand stricter gun laws (see my earlier post).
Or, is demand letter 3 (i’ll simply ignore that #’s 1 and 2 occurred in 2000…because that doesn’t fit the narrative we’re painting here)
and an e-mail between a field office and a boss clear evidence that Obama is after our gun rights.Soo…which dots are connected here?
See…it can’t be both. They are opposite. But, I’m sure whichever one gains the most steam (or any new ideas that you, Dave, Bob, Betty, or Congressman Issa can come up) will be the bandwagon that Obama haters will jump on and demand something from someone…at some time…somewhere.

greataunty, you know why Obama has been quiet on guns as President? That would be because it is a losing issue on the national scene. Go look at his record in Illinois as a state senator, a state with some of the most strict gun laws in the nation. But keep claiming he has no interests in banning guns just because he hasnt had the time or the will or the political opportunity to ban guns.

Yes, Holder finally said he was sorry for the Terry family’s loss — in a letter he first released to the press.

JM Hanes on June 21, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Do you or anyone knows if, say, we have a new AG starting jan next year, what are the chances that they can get tothe bottom of this? I mean I assume they will have access to all the past docs, etc, no? I don’t expect the current admin to make light of this whole thing before fhe elections, but I’d be content to know the truth about it all at any time in the future…I’m patient that is….my question is what is the likelihood (or is there even a possibility) that Holder and the current Obama minions in the DOJ make some of the inculpatory docs dissappear somehow?? .

oryguncon, I never said he has no interest. I’m merely pointing out
the illogical arguments that some are proffering up as evidence that he does, when in fact he has broadened gun owners rights. Some are claiming F&F is a smoking gun (pardon the pun), when it’s no such thing (IMO). It’s election year pabulum, same as in 2008.If you want to attack him, attack him on pertinent issues…which are many.

Calderon doesn’t seem to mind. He hasn’t said anything about this, ever, that I can recall. Prezzy EP must have promised him something to be paid off after the election. Does Mexico have an AG with any interest in this or does he have bigger fish to worry about.

More like complementary, but never mind. Good luck trying to sell Obama as our pro-gun President! He must be mighty irritated with those Democrats on Issa’s committee who were using F&F to call for gun control — just before the contempt vote was taken.

He wants to ban guns…by expanding gun-owner’s rights?
Wait, now I see the devious plan!

He didn’t veto the carry in parks legislation because it was attached to legislation that he absolutely needed. So, no points.

Flood the market with guns, expand gun owners rights…THEN sit back and watch everyone become horrified with the results (except the gun/ammo manufacturers, of course)therefore causing an anti-gun push at some undetermined point in the future. Ergo; gun ban.
That’s just simply genius!

What the he double hockey sticks are you trying to say here? That Obama was encouraging the explosion of firearms sales after his election? You obviously have little grasp of the concept of cause and effect. Again, no points

Why, using that circular logic, shouldn’t we be encouraging (hell, demanding!) more and more abortions? When the baby killers realize that the population is dwindling and mankind is diminishing…THEN we will ban all abortions, thereby winning the war (at some indeterminate point in the future).
I can’t believe it took me this long to see through Obama’s smokescreen.
Quick…someone get ahold of Jerome Corsi..we need a point-man for this conspiracy! (or do we….?)

greataunty on June 21, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Good heavens you people are stupid! Could you at least attempt to come up with a semi-cogent argument? This is just too easy, it’s really not that much fun kicking mental cripples and I don’t think your line of logic even rises to the level of mental cripple.

Obama not interesting in advancing gun laws? Hmmm, what was that he said to Sarah Brady on her visit to the White House? Oh, yeah, “We’re working on gun control, but under the radar”

Upon taking office, his White House web page included, “Re-instituting the assault weapons scary looking guns ban” as one of its goals.

Just because they had to abandon the goal because it was politically infeasible at this time and there were other ways for them to destroy freedom does not mean that they are still not seeking means to achieve that goal. Note that last link that reads, “it is still their goal”.

The ATF demand letter to border states ordering defacto gun registration for purchase of two or more semi-automatic rifles in excess of 22 caliber within a certain number of days in the border states is both illegal and further efforts at gun control.

So, pretty much your arguments are just so much BS and everyone on this blog lost intelligence by having read them. I award you no points and may the Lord have mercy on your soul.

Gosh, you really know how to hurt a girl’s feelings.I knew an insult was coming, but a “mental cripple”?
ouch
I guess proclaiming intellectual superiority means you “win”.
BTW, how’s that search for the birth certificate coming?

If F&F directives stopped with Holder, Obama wouldn’t have insinuated himself by invoking executive privilege. With the potential for back-door gun control as the original motivation, and then the need for “containment” as the plot morphed into a PR disaster, how could Holder not have been tied at the decision-making hip with Obama and Jarrett?